About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
CSPAN2 4
MSNBC 4
MSNBCW 4
CSPAN 2
LANGUAGE
English 25
Search Results 0 to 24 of about 25 (some duplicates have been removed)
. jenna: we researched the pentagon for a independent staff we haven't got it yet. we have the research department said if we had revisions in afghanistan over the years and we haven't found any. they told the associated press doesn't tell the full story of progress against the taliban. >> fair enough. it is a snapshot, not the movie. once again i think it is pretty important when the administration uses this. panetta said last year that attacks were down in afghanistan in 2012. it doesn't seem to be the case. if we need to get more answers. jenna: we'll look for more information. we continue to cover the story throughout the day here on fox news. peter, thanks for your insight. >> thanks for having me. jon: one town's attempt to go green has some folks seeing red amid complaints wind turbines are making people sick. all this could end up costing taxpayers millions. we're live with that story. >>> plus, what do you get when you cross a rodeo, kids and sheep? the answer is on the way. [ male announcer ] how do you measure happiness? by the armful? by the barrelful? e carful? how about...
that came out recently. it did suggest the pentagon is pushing the pentagon that would only keep 8000 troops in afghanistan. i know that general austin, you weren't a part of the process so far, but can you support a plan that was scheduled withdraws troops in advance? you know, we're looking at withdraws troops in afghanistan and according to this article from a passing down to 1000 within a short period of time, i have questions if we can even maintain our mission, let alone complete the mission. how can you make decisions on troop withdraw when sec previously, so much depends on the ground, what the government is doing, what variability eyes up to that point. how would you approach a proposal like that? >> i certainly would first really work hard to make sure i fully understood with the leadership wanted to get done moving into the future. certainly my advice is the commander on the ground or commander central command would provide my advice based upon breaking the security forces are and the conditions in theater and what i think we need to do to move forward to make sure we maintain the
to be running the pentagon. >> sam? >> well, i slightly disagree with robert. >> i thought you might. >> you know, actually it's funny because some of these questions did produce interesting, illustrative answers. for instance, when ron johnson got hillary clinton to say what difference does it make? well, it does make a difference. the problem i found with the questions was they ended up stepping on the news. they became so demonstrative and so theatrical that they ended up stealing the spotlight from the answers. that did a disservice in some respects to the question. >> is the real story the feeder of the questions or hagel's fumbling performance? i think it's the latter. i think hagel had a dismal performance at that hearing. did he seem competent to run the pentagon? there were a lot of questions even among democrats after that hearing whether he's ready. >> i don't disagree with that. i think hagel had a really poor performance. what i'm saying is for these senators -- if you looked at what ted cruz was asking about, association with an israeli diplomat that basically 99.9% of the coun
leadership and a few workers considered essential to maintain the pentagon security. he said, quote, the rigid nature of the cuts forced upon this department and their scale will result in a serious erosion of readiness across the force. house speaker john boehner for his part responding, president obama's ultimately responsible for our military readiness, so it's fair to ask what is he doing to stop his sequester that would hollow out our armed forces, end quote. john kerry also calling on congress to prevent what he calls senseless spending cuts and not just at the pentagon. today secretary kerry gave his first big speech since taking office and james rosen is live at the state department tonight to fill us in on this. what did he say today? >> good evening. this speech was given in advance of secretary kerry's first overseas travel which will be upcoming in a few days. speaking at the university of virginia, secretary kerry emphasized the degree to which america's foreign policy is governed by her economic well-being and said the current budget battle should not cause americans t
on the pentagon in ten days or so march 1st. that's when it's scheduled to kick in. you heard the president railing about it there. i'm jon scott along with jenna lee. a.b. stoddard is associate editor and a columnist for "the hill." the president railed about congress and this terrible law that was passed without mentioning that it was a white house idea, right? >> right. it is an idea that originated in the white house, but republicans certainly voted for the budget control act in 2011, which included the sequester, because they too thought it could be reversed or undone or replaced. and we're looking 18 months later at -- ten days as you said, not enough time to change these cuts. there is an acceptance in washington in both parties that it's going to go through, and both the white house, which is more recent, but the republican party as well have both said that this sky is going to fall if the sequester goes through. both are come police in it saying that these cuts are draconian and indiscriminate and irresponsible but here we are with both of them unable to come to an agreement. so th
effect. the pentagon needs a seasoned leader to diplomat these cuts, cuts for which an overwhelmingly majority of republicans in congress voted. the so-called sequester, mr. president, was supported by 174 republicans in the house of representatives, 28 republicans here in the senate, 60% and 75% of the two republican bodies in this country. we have a balanced proposal to replace those across-the-board cuts for this year with smart spending reductions which must continue, a measure to close corporate tax loopholes and wasteful subsidies. and revenue from the wealthiest among us, americans making millions of dollars each year. it's critical that the republicans and democrats come together to find a balanced way to avert these drastic cuts. the consequence of the so-called sequester cuts are real not only for national defense but for millions of american families and businesses alike. three-quarters of a million jobs, 750,000 jobs, mr. president, are at stake. across the country tens of thousands of teachers, including thousands of workers with disabled children would be laid off. 70,00
. as is widely recognized, sequestration over the next 10 years apply to the pentagon budget would only reduce it in inflation adjusted terms to what it was in 2007 a. the most powerful military in the world -- 2007, as the most powerful military in the world engaged in a war in iraq and the challenge in afghanistan. if members of congress pay attention to the facts, they will see a clear path to dramatically reduce pentagon spending without undermining america's position as being the most powerful nation on the planet. and nobody has done a better job of highlighting a path forward, an area of opportunity, than walter pinkus writhing on the pages of the "washington post" over the last couple years as he details the sweep of our nuclear weapons program and the spending trajectory. this morning's latest offering should be required reading for every member of congress and the ones who whine the loutest should be forced to read it -- loudest should be forced to read it twice. he details a vast array of nuclear weapons already deployed, ready to be deployed within 30 minutes, a relic of our conten
, those cuts would take 13% out of the pentagon's budget. 9% away from nondefense programs, and 11% out of unemployment insurance checks, senior administration officials are telling us that when those cuts begin causing pain across america, they believe republicans will cave under pressure from their constituents and agree to the increased revenue the president wants. just yesterday the president made his argument at a nuclear attack submarine plant in newport news, virginia. >> there are too many republicans in congress right now who refuse to compromise even an inch when it comes to closing tax loopholes and special interest tax breaks. that's what's holding things up right now. >> but republicans disagree and speaker of the house, john boehner, used some very colorful language to describe how unhelpful he thinks president obama's trip away from washington was so close to the deadline for sequestration. >> for 16 months the president has been traveling all over the country holding rallies instead of sitting down with senate leaders in order to try to forge an agreement over there in o
it through the bureaucracies of the pentagon. america needs chuck as our secretary of defense to bring our troops home and keep our military the strongest in the world. sergeant hagel was an american hero. when so many americans were dodging the draft he volunteered to serve in vietnam. the draft board gave him the option to return to college but chuck refused. he said i think the best thing for me is to go in the army. it may not be the best thing for the army but i think that's the way to get all this straightened out. yfsz the oldest of four boys, he said, my sphawr passed away and i just was not coming together the way i should. there was a war going on in vietnam, i felt a sense of some responsibility so i said no, i think it's time to go. and so i volunteered for the draft. went in the army and celebrated my 21st birthday in white sands missile range. and chuck didn't serve in a safe bullet. when assigned to germany he volunteered for vietnam and saw the horrors of war as an infrant fantdry sergeant. he hand his brother tom are the only known american brothers to serve side by side i
highlighted recently after the pentagon looked at ban on women serving in combat. while there's a lot of talk about the future of women in the military, we haven't spent a lot of time what the reality is for them now. that is the subject of a new book by an author known for her book turned tv series, "army wives". you might know that. her new book, umdaunted. the real story of american kfs women in the military. on bookstores today. congratulations. a big accomplishment. >> thank you very much. jenna: we don't spend a lot of time what is actually going on right now. you followed some women over a five, six-year period. tell us a little bit about the reality that they face. >> well, with this book i wanted to see what does it take to really be a successful servicewoman, what does it take? so i found these four extraordinary women who are all trailblazers. but the thing about the military is, professional success often comes at a personal price for both men and women but women face their own set of unique challenges that they often deal with out of public view. i wanted to examine that. jenna:
of veterans who are entitled to their health care by causing the pentagon possibly to have to reduce or eliminate tricare funding. that's just unconscionable to me. >> host: on the issue of blame that gregory kind of gets into, washington post poll out today asked about a thousand people about where they would assign blame in this sequester issue. 45% assigning it to congressional republicans, 32% to the president, another 13% assigned it equally between the two. about five more minutes of your calls, and we'll be back to the u.s. senate at 2:15 eastern. in california, rodney's on our democrats' line. >> caller: yes. i question the legality of the sequester agreement, because to my understanding sequester is to hold property by judicial authority. the property we're talking about here is the taxpayers' money. since congress has no judicial judicial -- since congress is not a judicial branch of the government with nor do they have judicial power, i don't understand how could they even implement the sequester? >> host: here's a tweet that says the sequester was obama's idea, but it bac
's pick to head up the pentagon. we will talk to bob carey about what all of that means. >> mr. president, we will stand and fight throughout this country as americans for our freedom. >> the gun rights groups say they are working to protect the second amendment so we are going to take a look at what rights the second amendment affords and which it does not. we start with developing news in florida where the white house confirmed that president obama teed off with golfing great tiger woods today. woods lives about an hour and a half from where president obama is vacationing. they will be on the course for several more hours of course. joining us on the course is tim rosaforte. you are at the resort with the president. what more can you tell us? >> the floridaen golf and react club in palm city, florida is where they played their round of golf. the president is visiting here through some friends of his in houston. he was introduced to the golf course and as a result of that has decided to take a golf buddies trip more than anything else. he took lessons from butch harmon and his son, claud
heading up the pentagon and obviously israel will want our help if they find themselves in an armed conflict with iran. what are the stakes for israel in seeing hagel? president obama is going to set that policy not hagel, right? but he's got some independent power. >> well, look, the question is, what kind of message are we sending the enemies of the united states which are also the enemies of all person liberal democracies, including our ally in the middle east on the front line on the war of islamist terrorism. last week hamas in its newspaper published an article, saying that a confirmation of hagel of secretary of defense would be in its favor and reduce the likelihood of the united states and iran getting nuclear weapons and reduce the united states supporting israel from defeating hamas and this is from a designated terrorist group and beyond that, is he an effective leader? does he have the credibility to reach across the aisle and do what he says he's going to do with the republicans, for example? >> i'm sure he would have rather not had the help from hamas. thank you for y
essential. i'm proud of the partnerships the state department has formed with the pentagon. america's traditional allies and friends in europe and east asia remain in valuable partners in nearly everything we do. we've spent energy strengthening those bonds over the past four years. the un and world bank and nato are still essentials. all of our institutions and relationships check need to be modernized and complemented by new institutions and partnerships that are tailored for new challenges and model to the needs of a variable landscape. like how we elevated the g-20 during the financial crisis or created the climate and clean air coalition to fight short live pollutants like black carbon. or work with parties where we stood up the first global terrorism forum. we are working with organizations. consider the arab league in libya. even the lower mekong initiative that we created to help reintegrate burma into its neighborhood and try to work across national boundaries on whether dams should or should not be billult. ilt. world, people want to actually show up. a secretary state mig
Search Results 0 to 24 of about 25 (some duplicates have been removed)